Why are there only two customers (Delta & Continental) for the 767-400? Its seems a very capable twin and Im surprised that more airlines havent ordered it!http://www.jetsite.com.br/images/767-400.jpgOr is superior performance offered by the A330 series? Just curious...specially after getting the excellent Posky rendition of it!

Perhaps cost at a time when most airlines are in some form of bancruptcy protection. Perhaps they've studied and found that while it is more capable, they don't need the capability as their current fleet meets their needs. Could be many things.----------------------------------------------------------------John MorganReal World: KGEG, UND Aerospace Spokane Satillite, Private ASEL 141.2 hrs, 314 landings, 46 inst. apprs.Virtual: MSFS 2004"There is a feeling about an airport that no other piece of ground can have. No matter what the name of the country on whose land it lies, an airport is a place you can see and touch that leads to a reality that can only be thought and felt." - The Bridge Across Forever: A Love Story by Richard Bach

Nevin,Think I've read somewhere that it was specially requested by those two carriers, especially Delta.regards,Markhttp://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a319/mar.../sup_banner.jpghttp://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a319/markrey/lsd2.jpgXPHomeSP2/FS9.1/3.2HT/1GIG/X700pro256

Too specialist, explicitly aimed at very large 767 operators who want something akin to the 777-200 in size without the different training and maintenance requirements.But that at the cost of lesser performance and economy.So for almost everyone the 777 is a better choice, and even the 767-400 operators are now using those.

Thanks for your input friends :)I have to say it looks real smart in Delta's new colours. BTW is there a big performance difference between having winglets & raked wingtips? They both have the same purpose right (except that the raked tips give increase the wingspan more).So yea this jet is my new fav on FS9 @ the moment!

If I recall correctly, the winglets are more to reduce the strength of the wingtip vortices that produce wake turbulance.----------------------------------------------------------------John MorganReal World: KGEG, UND Aerospace Spokane Satillite, Private ASEL 141.2 hrs, 314 landings, 46 inst. apprs.Virtual: MSFS 2004"There is a feeling about an airport that no other piece of ground can have. No matter what the name of the country on whose land it lies, an airport is a place you can see and touch that leads to a reality that can only be thought and felt." - The Bridge Across Forever: A Love Story by Richard Bach

Would depend on the overall design of the wing.Some wings will benefit more from one, some from the other.

methinks one of THE most important aspects of rakes/fences is increased range. Less votices=less drag at wingtips=less thrust for same speed=less fuel burned over same distance=increased range.Parrotphrasing what I read someplace but makes sense.regards,Markhttp://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a319/mar.../sup_banner.jpghttp://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a319/markrey/lsd2.jpgXPHomeSP2/FS9.1/3.2HT/1GIG/X700pro256

Yea you are all right! I found these drawings really illustrating:http://www.b737.org.uk/737winglets.jpg

Its more a compromise. Raked wingtips have been shown to be more effective then blended winglets, but on the downside they increase the wingspan by a greater factor which can affect gate assignments.For example, most 737NGs have blended winglets, but the military version for the US Navy (MMA), which has no concern at all about gate assignments, has raked wingtips.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:MMA.jpg

------------------------------------------------------------------------For example, most 737NGs have blended winglets, but the military version for the US Navy (MMA), which has no concern at all about gate assignments, has raked wingtips.------------------------------------------------------------------------Now thats interesting. I didnt know that :)

because it was only made for those 2 carriers, Boeing wanted to make a good impression so they designed it for their needs, other companies were either buying the 767, airbus, or waiting for the triple 7